[subego]

@Chongo

What is your opinion on the Marriage Pledge?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

@Chongo

What is your opinion on the Marriage Pledge?

Unfortunately, it's akin to throwing in the towel, but it is something that will eventully be done to prevent the government from intruding on one of the Seven Sacraments. By signing a marriage license, a Priest/Deacon or Protestant Minister acts as an officer of the court. By doing so now, they prevent being told, as offiicers of the court, they have to.

You can say "But we have the 1st Amendment, that will never happenin the US." The 1st Amnedment hasn't stopped The Obama administration in the past. (Hosanna Tabor V EEOC, The HHS Mandate)

[The Final Dakar]

Federal Judge Overturns Nebraska Gay Marriage Ban

A federal judge has ruled Nebraska's statewide ban on gay marriage unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon issued the ruling Monday, saying county clerks will be permitted to begin issuing gay marriage licenses on March 9.

"[A]ll relevant state officials are ordered to treat same-sex couples the same as different sex couples in the context of processing a marriage license or determining the rights, protections, obligations or benefits of marriage," he wrote in the order.

The Nebraska attorney general's office has already said it will appeal the judge's order. Attorney General Doug Peterson is confident the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals will grant the appeal.

Bataillon has struck down the state's ban on gay marriage before; in 2005, the judge ruled the ban unconstitutional, but the Eight Circuit reversed his decision in July 2006.

Without fanfare, Nebraska lifts ban on gay people being foster parents - Omaha.com: Nebraska

However, Nebraska continues to defend the policy against a legal challenge filed by three Lincoln couples. Their lawsuit is pending in Lancaster County District Court.

The policy has been in place since 1995, when HHS’s then-director outlined it in an administrative memo.

The memo bars unmarried, unrelated adults who live together from becoming foster parents or from having children placed with them. The policy affects homosexual couples, unmarried heterosexual couples and platonic roommates.

The policy also bars licensing or placing children with “persons who identify themselves as homosexuals,” whether those people live with a partner or not. Other single people are not prohibited from being foster parents in Nebraska.

Nebraska and Utah are the only two states with formal restrictions on gay and lesbian people being foster parents.

[The Final Dakar]

Ohio deserves an award for having avoided it so long. Never would have guessed Utah or Georgia or South Carolina would beat them there.

[Chongo]

So, once judges have forced same sex unions on all 50 states, what's next?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

So, once judges have forced same sex unions overturned unconstitutional laws on all 50 states, what's next?

Talk about a leading question. Obviously, you already have some answer, so why not just share it with us, rather than go through this charade?

[subego]

There pretty much isn't anything. Party's pretty much over.

Polygamy, I guess. Which I will reiterate: should be legal.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

There pretty much isn't anything. Party's pretty much over.

Polygamy, I guess. Which I will reiterate: should be legal.

I imagine it'll be that or incest that he's going to mention.

Given the knee jerk reaction to transgenderism, I'd say that, except I think it's mostly covered by a combo of gender equality and gay nondiscrimination laws.

Maybe that's the answer: ENDA. God knows its being framed as conflicting with freedom of religion, so Rs will make a big deal of it, getting it the kind of attention that will make progressives fight for it much sooner, just like the current state of things is fallout from 2004.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Talk about a leading question. Obviously, you already have some answer, so why not just share it with us, rather than go through this charade?

Originally Posted by subego 

There pretty much isn't anything. Party's pretty much over.

Polygamy, I guess. Which I will reiterate: should be legal.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I imagine it'll be that or incest that he's going to mention.

Not even close. We'll keep an eye on the courts though.

Given the knee jerk reaction to transgenderism, I'd say that, except I think it's mostly covered by a combo of gender equality and gay nondiscrimination laws.

Maybe that's the answer: ENDA. God knows its being framed as conflicting with freedom of religion, so Rs will make a big deal of it, getting it the kind of attention that will make progressives fight for it much sooner, just like the current state of things is fallout from 2004.

Ding dind ding. Ramping up the attack on the Church and her teaching. Archbishop Cordileone is already under attack:
What’s Going on in San Francisco? | CatholicVote.org

What exactly is going on in San Francisco?

Here’s the quick version, with links to more information:

1. Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco added a clause to the handbook for Catholic high school teachers in four diocesan schools. The clause asked teachers to affirm basic Catholic doctrine and not to publicly contradict Church teaching in order to avoid confusing students.

2.The Archbishop also explained the reasons for adding this clause in a letter to Catholic high school teachers.
Eight state lawmakers in California wrote the Archbishop a letter asking him to remove any requirement that teachers publicly follow Catholic doctrine on the basis of “discrimination.”

3. The Archbishop responded with a letter to these eight lawmakers, saying “would you hire a campaign manager who advocates policies contrary to those that you stand for, and who shows disrespect toward you and the Democratic Party in general?…I respect your right to employ or not employ whomever you wish to advance your mission. I simply ask the same respect from you.”

4. Then, two of the lawmakers demanded an investigation into the “working conditions” in diocesan high schools, a blatant bullying tactic to force him to back down on defending religious liberty.

5. The Archbishop has not backed down. He has announced he would form a committee of theology teachers to help articulate the changes.

From Canada:
Catholicism - A Hate Crime in Canada?

[subego]

The Church is totally exempt from anti-discrimination laws, by unanimous Supreme Court decision I might add.

But not with laypeople.

Hire laypeople, play by laypeople rules.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

The Church is totally exempt from anti-discrimination laws, by unanimous Supreme Court decision I might add.

Hosanah-Tabor vs EEOC

But not with laypeople.

Hire laypeople, play by laypeople rules.

Hosanah-Tabor is about lay teachers being lay ministers. That still won't stop advocates from taking the Church to court.

[subego]

But that will achieve precisely zero if the people in question are ministers.

This goes to court in SF because the diocese doesn't consider them ministers. If they did, there wouldn't be a leg for the city to stand on.

Seriously... this isn't enough protection for you?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

But that will achieve precisely zero if the people in question are ministers.

This goes to court in SF because the diocese doesn't consider them ministers. If they did, there wouldn't be a leg for the city to stand on.

Seriously... this isn't enough protection for you?

If that is the case, the diocee will have some redefining to do.

As far as being "enough protection," we will see. We will see what happens to employees who fail to attend company "diversity" events. We've seen what's happened to wedding related businesses already.

[subego]

The diocese is in collective bargaining with the teacher's union about that very subject.

As for wedding cakes... look, I won't deny Catholicism is really taking on the chin with this SSM thing, and believe it or not, I have a great deal of sympathy for the bind Catholics are in, but I can only have so much sympathy for the fraction of Catholics who are in the wedding business, and can't lie their way out of servicing same-sex weddings.

If this is the best the gays can come up with, it's like I said: the party's over. Wedding cakes are mop-up.

[Chongo]

The law of unintended consequences says there will be more fallout than just affecting the wedding industry.

[subego]

I'm not claiming the fallout won't exist, I'm saying it'll be penny-ante compared to the redefinition of marriage.

[Chongo]

The Church has already had to close adoption agencies because it would not place children with anything other than traditional married couples.

[subego]

These are all examples of the fallout from marriage being redefined.

Isn't the question what's next?

[Chongo]

The Pope has already spoken against what he calls "idealogical colonization" of gender Ideology. It's an understatement to say the left wing media is not pleased.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

lay ministers

This is an oxymoron.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

The Pope has already spoken against what he calls "idealogical colonization" of gender Ideology. It's an understatement to say the left wing media is not pleased.

The first link I looked at said this was in reference to family, not gender.

The link summed up the statement as being anti-SSM, and anti-contraception.

So, a retread, right?

Where does gender come in?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

The first link I looked at said this was in reference to family, not gender.

The link summed up the statement as being anti-SSM, and anti-contraception.

So, a retread, right?

Where does gender come in?

From his post Philippines trip presser

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis cautioned on Monday that gender ideologies from the wealthy Western world are being imposed on developing nations by tying them to foreign aid and education, in a form of “ideological colonization.”
“A people enters with an idea that has nothing, nothing to do with the nation. … And they colonize the people with an idea that changes, or wants to change, a mentality or a structure,” he said Jan. 19 during a press conference on his return flight to Rome from the Philippines.
“They use the need of a people to take an opportunity to enter and grow strong — with the children.”
The Pope referred to the imposition of foreign ideas into a culture as “ideological colonization,” adding that it is sometimes tied to financial assistance.
“I’ll give just one example that I saw myself,” he said to journalists on the flight. He recounted the case of a public-service officer who sought loans in order to be able to build schools for the poor two decades ago.
She received the money, he said, on the condition that she insert a “well-prepared” book into the curriculum to teach “gender theory.”
“This woman needed the money, but that was the condition,” explained the Pope. “Clever girl, she said, ‘Yes.’” And, as a result, the goal of the financiers was achieved, he said.
“This is the [concept of] ideological colonization,” said Pope Francis.
He explained that bishops from Africa deplored similar occurrences in their nations during the October 2014 Synod of Bishops on the pastoral care of the family.
This colonization process passes through the youngest, said the Pope. “The same was done by the dictatorships of the last century. They entered with their own doctrine,” he remarked.
“Think of the Hitler Youth,” he said in reference to the Nazi-training programs to indoctrinate young people to party ideas.
“But how much suffering. Peoples must not lose their freedom,” he said.
“When conditions are imposed by imperial colonizers, they seek to make [these] peoples lose their own identity and make a uniformity [in society],” he said. “This is the globalization of the sphere — all the points are equidistant from the center.”
However, “true globalization” doesn’t take the form of a sphere, creating uniformity and equal distances from the center, said Pope Francis.
Rather, he said, it is important that it is a “polyhedron,” multifaceted, so “that every people, every part, conserves its own identity without being ideologically colonized. These are the ideological colonizations.”


Read more: Pope Francis Warns West Over ‘Ideological Colonization’ | Daily News | NCRegister.com

[Chongo]

Lay Ministers

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

This is an oxymoron.

Lay Ecclesial Ministry

Co-Workers in the Vineyard of the Lord is a resource for diocesan bishops and for all others who are responsible for guiding the development of lay ecclesial ministry in the United States. For several decades and in growing numbers, lay men and women have been undertaking a wide variety of roles in Church ministries. Many of these roles presume a significant degree of preparation, formation, and professional competence. They require authorization of the hierarchy in order for the person to serve publicly in the local church. They entrust to laity responsibilities for leadership in particular areas of ministry and thereby draw certain lay persons into a close mutual collaboration with the pastoral ministry of bishops, priests, and deacons.

These men and women of every race and culture who serve in parishes, schools, diocesan agencies, and Church institutions are identified by many different position titles. In Co-Workers in the Vineyard of the Lord they are identified in a generic way as "lay ecclesial ministers." This reflects on what they have in common and to propose some understandings of lay ecclesial ministry situated within our social and ecclesial environment and within the framework of the Church's belief, teaching, and pastoral practice.

Also available in Spanish

The bishops write that "We provide this document as a pastoral and theological reflection on the reality of lay ecclesial ministry, as an affirmation of those who serve in this way, and as a synthesis of best thinking and practice." The following components provide the structure of the document:

Theological foundations for lay ecclesial ministry
Discernment and suitability for lay ecclesial ministry
Formation of lay ecclesial ministers
Authorization of lay ecclesial ministers
Policies and practices in the ministerial workplace

Co-Workers in the Vineyard of the Lord is a common frame of reference for ensuring that the development of lay ecclesial ministry continues in ways that are faithful to the Church's theological and doctrinal tradition and that respond to contemporary pastoral needs and situations. Unlike the USCCB documents Program of Priestly Formation and the National Directory for the Formation, Ministry, and Life of Permanent Deacons, Co-Workers in the Vineyard of the Lord does not propose norms or establish particular law. It expresses at this point in history what the bishops have learned from the experience of lay ecclesial ministry in the United States. It suggests concepts, goals, strategies, resources, and ideas to consider. It invites local adaptation, application, and implementation to achieve consistency where possible and to encourage diversity where appropriate. It calls Church leaders, ordained and lay, to become more intentional and effective in ordering and integrating lay ecclesial ministers within the ministerial life and structures of our dioceses.

Co-Workers in the Vineyard of the Lord expresses the bishops' strong desire for the fruitful collaboration of ordained and lay ministers who, in distinct but complementary ways, continue in the Church the saving mission of Christ for the world, his vineyard.

Copies available for purchase at USCCB Publishing

They are also known as Lay Apostolates. They include religious orders such as the Third Order Franciscans, The Knight of Columbus, Catholic Answers, Sisters of Mercy, Little Sisters of the Poor, and the Missionaries of Charity (founded by Mother Teresa)

[The Final Dakar]

LGBT Defeat: Council Rejects Non-Discrimination Expansion | WFAE

Monday night Charlotte’s City Council voted down a proposal to expand the city’s nondiscrimination laws to protect LGBT people. The vote was 6 to 5. It’s a major blow to LGBT rights advocates and a victory for those who saw the move as part of a war against religious freedom.

“I do not advocate beating a homosexual up, tonight I stand advocating on the truth of God’s word, which simply reminds us that a man is a man and a woman is a woman,” Rogers said.

If only it were that simple...

But Jeannette Wilson, a mother of seven, was unapologetic in her criticism of LGBT people and the ordinance. She said the provision that would have allowed transgender people to use the bathroom of their choice put children at risk of being molested. “There’s an element of safety implied with a little picture of the man on one door and the picture of a woman on one door,” Wilson said. “This is going to be a real problem for families in Charlotte. I don’t want to expose me and my children to these perverse things.”

To which a protester interrupted Wilson’s speech and said, “Pedophiles are heterosexuals.”

Heh, used to be gays were pedophiles. Now it's just down to transgender, I guess.

To quiet the occasional outbursts, Dr. Leon Threatt of CFA Ministries encouraged the crowd to love those who are different. But Threatt, an African American, also let it be known that he resents LGBT advocates equating their struggles with the civil rights movement. “I don’t know of any LGBT being asked to travel in the back of the bus. I don’t know anyone from LGBT being denied the opportunity to work, so don’t try to jump on the wagon with an illegitimate cause. This is a moral matter, not a civil rights matter,” Threatt said. “Those who labored and suffered and bled would be ashamed by this fraudulent attempt to address this matter as a civil rights matter. This is a moral matter, not a civil rights matter.”

oh ok

"The proposal before the council tonight would add marital status, familial status, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression as protected characteristics to the passenger vehicle for hire ordinance as well as the commercial non-discrimination ordinance."

Thus making it illegal for taxi drivers, restaurants or any business to decline service to LGBT customers. But Hageman went further, stating indecent exposure or predatory actions on women or children are and would still be against the law. And he brought up case law which, he said, shows the proposed changes were not tantamount to religious discrimination. "As a matter of constitutional law, courts have not recognized the right of an individual based on their religious beliefs, no matter how closely held, to demand an exception of a law of general applicability."

Philip Benham was the first member of the public to speak to the council. "Mr. Hageman that is the most convoluted bunch of poppycock I have ever heard in my entire life." The minister quoted Leviticus in his opposition to the proposed law. "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God. Do not be deceived."

I just can't...

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Lay Ecclesial Ministry

The origin of the term being a religious group does nothing to disprove my point.

Originally Posted by Chongo 

They are also known as Lay Apostolates. They include religious orders such as the Third Order Franciscans, The Knight of Columbus, Catholic Answers, Sisters of Mercy, Little Sisters of the Poor, and the Missionaries of Charity (founded by Mother Teresa)

Unless I missed something, we're talking about teachers. Teachers are not a religious order (Though some may be part of one).

I'm a little unclear on the limits of "not to publicly contradict Church teaching" is. In the classroom, during school hours, or anytime anywhere?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

The origin of the term being a religious group does nothing to disprove my point.



Unless I missed something, we're talking about teachers. Teachers are not a religious order (Though some may be part of one).

I'm a little unclear on the limits of "not to publicly contradict Church teaching" is. In the classroom, during school hours, or anytime anywhere?

All three.
I did not say teachers were a religious order. Teachers are considered lay ministers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_(Catholic_Church)

Lay ministers[edit]
In a general sense, any Christian exercising a ministry is a minister. Since all the baptised are part of the universal priesthood, whenever they engage in their vocation to evangelize the world and to help those in need, they are ministers.

In addition, the Church calls people to the responsible stewardship of their time and talent in support of the Church. This often takes the form of volunteering for a specific lay ministry, most of which are liturgical, catechetical, or involved in pastoral care and social justice.

Liturgical lay ministries include lectors (Ministers of the Word) who proclaim scriptural (the Bible) passages during the Eucharist, altar servers and acolytes who assist the presider at the altar, cantors and music ministers who lead the singing, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion who serve during Mass and/or who take Holy Communion to the sick and homebound, and ushers or ministers of hospitality who direct the seating and procession of the assembly.

Catechetical lay ministries include catechists (Sunday school teachers and teachers at Catholic schools), dismissal leaders (ministers who lead RCIA catechumens on Sundays), retreat leaders, youth group leaders, and Scout religious emblems counselors.

Other lay ministries include those who work with charitable activities, pastoral care and outreach, or advocacy for social justice.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

All three.

And you have no problem with the Church limiting the free speech rights of people outside of work just because they're signing their checks?

Originally Posted by Chongo 

I did not say teachers were a religious order.

I didn't say you did. I said you compared them with religious orders:

Originally Posted by Chongo 

They are also known as Lay Apostolates. They include religious orders such as the Third Order Franciscans, The Knight of Columbus, Catholic Answers, Sisters of Mercy, Little Sisters of the Poor, and the Missionaries of Charity (founded by Mother Teresa)

I pointed out that all your examples of lay apostates (which you compared the designation to) were religious orders. i.e., everyone else who is a lay minister is coming from a place of religion. Not so with the teachers.

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Teachers are considered lay ministers.

By the church. It's a designation being used for obvious legal reasons.

[The Final Dakar]

Alabama is really taking this to the next level.
In defiant ruling, Alabama Supreme Court stops same-sex marriage in state - The Washington Post

The Alabama Supreme Court ordered a halt Tuesday to same-sex marriages in the state despite a U.S. Supreme Court order allowing them to proceed. The ruling capped a wild month of confusion and resistance in Alabama following a January decision by a U.S. district court invalidating Alabama’s ban on gay marriage.

What happens next is unclear. Presumably someone will go back to the federal courts to overturn the ruling. But short of a ruling on gay marriage by the nation’s highest court, which isn’t expected for months, the standoff seems likely to continue. The Alabama court suggested that it would be bound by the U.S. Supreme Court but nothing lower than that.

Indeed, the state’s highest court declared itself equally empowered as the lower federal courts to decide whether Alabama’s ban on same-sex marriage violates the Constitution — stating unequivocally that it does not in what amounted to a broadside against the trend of courts invalidating same-sex marriage bans.

“Marriage has always been between members of the opposite sex,” it said. “The obvious reason for this immutable characteristic is nature. Men and women complement each other biologically and socially. Perhaps even more obvious, the sexual union between men and women (often) produces children. … In short, government has an obvious interest in offspring and the consequences that flow from the creation.”

Many thought the U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to stay the lower court decision invalidating the ban meant that Alabama had to, or ought to, comply and issue marriage licenses. But that was not to be. About a third of the state’s 67 counties began issuing licenses, but the other two-thirds refused, citing a letter by Alabama’s firebrand chief justice Roy Moore telling them to ignore the federal court ruling. (Moore did not take part in yesterday’s ruling.)

Six of the court’s nine justices concurred in yesterday’s opinion. A seventh concurred in part and there was a single dissent, based not on constitutional issues but a contention that the court did not have jurisdiction.

[The Final Dakar]

While we're at it... Ben Carson: Prisons prove being gay is a choice - CNN.com

[subego]

There's certainly a choice element with some people.

Many don't find this fact politically conveinent, so it gets ignored.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

There's certainly a choice element with some people.

Many don't find this fact politically conveinent, so it gets ignored.

I wonder though if he's not combining people who have gay sex in jail with the smaller minority who continue to do so after leaving.

[subego]

Aren't people changing back and forth that which is to be demonstrated?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Aren't people changing back and forth that which is to be demonstrated?

He specifically mentions people leaving who stay gay, at least that's how I interpreted it.


I don't feel like getting into the 'a hole's a hole' or the man dying of thirst aspects of the argument.

[subego]

I've mentioned this before.

I could be gay if I worked at it.

I'm not going to try and claim this is a common situation, but there's no way in hell I'm unique.

This means both I can be influenced by outside stimuli (such as whether being gay is accepted) and in theory, get cured.

As I said before. These are extraordinarily inconvenient facts for some people.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

I've mentioned this before.

I could be gay if I worked at it.

I'm not going to try and claim this is a common situation, but there's no way in hell I'm unique.

This means both I can be influenced by outside stimuli (such as whether being gay is accepted) and in theory, get cured.

As I said before. These are extraordinarily inconvenient facts for some people.

Nature vs. Nurture. It's logical.

Can we move back to the discussion that isn't old as ****?

[subego]

No.

You don't get to pull this "derail" shit on me for talking about gayness in a gay thread.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

No.

You don't get to pull this "derail" shit on me for talking about gayness in a gay thread.

I didn't say derail, now did I? I said it was a retread. But please, enlighten me with a new and amazing perspective I haven't heard in this very thread yet.

[subego]

You hear pro-gay people talking about the legitimacy of the choice claim?

Personally, I find most deny it, and it frosts the 'ol ass.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Personally, I find most deny it, and it frosts the 'ol ass.

Perhaps because for most it wasn't a choice? You see zero straight people who say they chose it (gay converts notwithstanding)

[subego]

Society hasn't created an environment where you can give that question objective consideration without great effort.

Since the moment you've been born, you've been either indirectly or directly taught gay sex is disgusting, and gay men are considered by a large segment of society to be pariahs.

I posit not only does this make it difficult to look at the question objectively, unless women make you vomit, it's strongly discouraging you from even opening the box, lest something sticky be let out.

[The Final Dakar]

I didn't know, Oregon has a bisexual governor now.

[subego]

So... you were born yesterday?

[The Final Dakar]

Here's one of the most humiliating things I've ever read.
Home Office says Nigerian asylum-seeker can’t be a lesbian as she’s got children - Home News - UK - The Independent

Aderonke Apata, who fears imprisonment and death because of her sexuality, appeared in London’s High Court to challenge the Home Office’s refusal to grant her asylum in Britain. Ms Apata, who came to Britain in 2004 and has won awards for her gay-rights campaigning, is so desperate to convince the Government of her sexuality that she has submitted a DVD and photographs of her sex life as evidence.

But the Home Office argues that Ms Apata could not be considered a lesbian because she has children and has previously been in heterosexual relationships. Ms Apata’s barrister, Abid Mahmood, said these were “highly offensive… stereotypical views of the past”.

The Home Secretary’s barrister, Andrew Bird, argued that Ms Apata was “not part of the social group known as lesbians” but had “indulged in same-sex activity”. He continued: “You can’t be a heterosexual one day and a lesbian the next day. Just as you can’t change your race.”

Ms Apata was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress in 2005 and attempted suicide when she was in prison facing deportation. Her fragile mental health forms part of the case that she would suffer if returned to Nigeria.

[OAW]

^^^

The stupid is strong in the Home Secretary's barrister.

OAW

[subego]

My instincts tell me there's an important missing piece here.

Doubtful it would somehow justify it, but something which makes it less nonsensical.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

My instincts tell me there's an important missing piece here.

Doubtful it would somehow justify it, but something which makes it less nonsensical.

The easy assumption is they're lying about the reason.

[subego]

That's my first thought, but you float bogus reasons because the real reason looks bad...

This looks bad.

[subego]

Nigeria must be putting the squeeze on them, but how? What's their leverage?

[The Final Dakar]

It's interesting to note that Carson's position on sexuality and the UKs are extreme opposites.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

So, once judges have forced same sex unions on all 50 states, what's next?

This is: Anticipating Nationwide Right to Same-Sex Marriage, States Weigh Religious Exemption Bills

As it looks increasingly likely that the Supreme Court will establish a nationwide right to same-sex marriage later this year, state legislatures across the country are taking up bills that would make it easier for businesses and individuals to opt out of serving gay couples on religious grounds.

As in Arizona last year, some of the new bills are already experiencing pushback from businesses and prominent conservatives who are concerned that they might lead to boycotts or harm their states’ reputations.

In Arkansas, a so-called conscience protection bill was scuttled in the Judiciary Committee of the State Senate on Feb. 25, a day after homegrown retail giant Walmart released a statement arguing that the bill would send “the wrong message about Arkansas, as well as the diverse environment which exists in the state.”

In Georgia, powerful business interests helped kill similar legislation last year. Opposition to two similar bills remains strong among a portion of the state’s elite, who are sensitive to the perceptions that Southern states, in particular, can be havens of intolerance.

So companies and politicians aren't opposed to these bills on the ground of them being improper or unfair. They are opposed because the might give the right impression about the states that are passing them. Apparently being viewed as anti-gay is somehow worse than actually being anti-gay in their eyes. What a ****ing world.